OBJECTIVE: Liraglutide and dulaglutide have demonstrated similar glycemic efficacy and safety. However, they differ in treatment administration and injection devices. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare patient perceptions of the injection devices used with liraglutide and dulaglutide. METHODS: Patients with type 2 diabetes treated with liraglutide or dulaglutide were recruited from across the US. Patients completed the Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) to rate their current injection device. Patients who had experience with both treatments also completed the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ) to report preferences between the two devices. ANCOVAs were conducted to compare DID-EQ scores between dulaglutide and liraglutide patients, while controlling for covariates. Descriptive statistics are presented for preferences reported on the DID-PQ. RESULTS: A total of 404 patients were recruited from 49 states (mean age = 60.7 years; 54.0% female; 204 liraglutide; 200 dulaglutide). Mean DID-EQ item scores for both treatments were high, ranging from 3.48 to 3.90 on a 4 point scale. ANCOVAs found significantly higher scores for dulaglutide than liraglutide on DID-EQ global items assessing ease of use (3.82 vs. 3.73, p = .040) and convenience (3.79 vs. 3.66, p = .004). Among the 58 patients who had used both devices, more patients reported a preference for the dulaglutide device than the liraglutide device on every item of the DID-PQ. CONCLUSIONS: High DID-EQ scores indicate positive perceptions of both the liraglutide and dulaglutide injection devices. The dulaglutide device was associated with slightly higher scores for ease of use and convenience than the liraglutide device.
OBJECTIVE: Liraglutide and dulaglutide have demonstrated similar glycemic efficacy and safety. However, they differ in treatment administration and injection devices. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare patient perceptions of the injection devices used with liraglutide and dulaglutide. METHODS:Patients with type 2 diabetes treated with liraglutide or dulaglutide were recruited from across the US. Patients completed the Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) to rate their current injection device. Patients who had experience with both treatments also completed the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ) to report preferences between the two devices. ANCOVAs were conducted to compare DID-EQ scores between dulaglutide and liraglutide patients, while controlling for covariates. Descriptive statistics are presented for preferences reported on the DID-PQ. RESULTS: A total of 404 patients were recruited from 49 states (mean age = 60.7 years; 54.0% female; 204 liraglutide; 200 dulaglutide). Mean DID-EQ item scores for both treatments were high, ranging from 3.48 to 3.90 on a 4 point scale. ANCOVAs found significantly higher scores for dulaglutide than liraglutide on DID-EQ global items assessing ease of use (3.82 vs. 3.73, p = .040) and convenience (3.79 vs. 3.66, p = .004). Among the 58 patients who had used both devices, more patients reported a preference for the dulaglutide device than the liraglutide device on every item of the DID-PQ. CONCLUSIONS: High DID-EQ scores indicate positive perceptions of both the liraglutide and dulaglutide injection devices. The dulaglutide device was associated with slightly higher scores for ease of use and convenience than the liraglutide device.
Authors: Johan Jendle; Andreas L Birkenfeld; William H Polonsky; Robert Silver; Kari Uusinarkaus; Thomas Hansen; Jonas Håkan-Bloch; Sayeh Tadayon; Melanie J Davies Journal: Diabetes Obes Metab Date: 2019-07-12 Impact factor: 6.577
Authors: Louis S Matza; Kristina S Boye; Katie D Stewart; Karin S Coyne; Paula K Wullenweber; Katelyn N Cutts; Jessica B Jordan; Qianqian Wang; Maria Yu; Brooke M Currie; Karen G Malley; K Jack Ishak; Ryan T Hietpas; Luis-Emilio García-Pérez Journal: Diabetes Obes Metab Date: 2019-12-19 Impact factor: 6.577
Authors: Louis S Matza; Beatrice Osumili; Katie D Stewart; Magaly Perez-Nieves; Jessica Jordan; Giovanni Biricolti; Ester Romoli; Serena Losi; Silvia Del Santo; Erik Spaepen; Gordon Parola; Hayley Karn; Kristina S Boye Journal: Diabetes Ther Date: 2019-11-23 Impact factor: 2.945
Authors: José Gerardo González-González; Alejandro Díaz González-Colmenero; Juan Manuel Millán-Alanís; Lyubov Lytvyn; Ricardo Cesar Solis; Reem A Mustafa; Suetonia C Palmer; Sheyu Li; Qiukui Hao; Neri Alejandro Alvarez-Villalobos; Per Olav Vandvik; René Rodríguez-Gutiérrez Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-07-09 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Kristina S Boye; Jessica B Jordan; Raleigh E Malik; Brooke M Currie; Louis S Matza Journal: Diabetes Ther Date: 2021-07-23 Impact factor: 2.945
Authors: Kevin Fernando; Stephen C Bain; Patrick Holmes; Philip Newland Jones; Dipesh C Patel Journal: Diabetes Ther Date: 2021-07-26 Impact factor: 2.945